Tuesday, November 13, 2012

Obama And The Military: Their Coup, Or His ?

I'll report, you can decide...here's one version (love the asterisked ending):

It appears that General Petraeus found out, while at the C.I.A., that the 2012 election was going to be fixed. Word is Petraeus was going to put a stop to it but was checkmated by Eric Holders F.B.I. investigation on, really him, not his girlfriend. When the Administration found out about the General’s move, they pulled out their ace-in-a-hole against the General and forced him to get out-a-Dodge and resign. Obama knew that Petraeus was Presidential material and would win a Presidential election. He had to find anything he could to discredit him, and he did!!! You see Obama had to clear his way for his third term in 2016. Yes, that’s right, his third term.**Don’t ask me for sources. This is what I’ve pieced together from several sources that I will never name.

A shocking new report...states that President Obama has fired one of the United States Navy’s most powerful Admirals over growing fears the US Military is planning an overthrow of his government.

According to this report, yesterday (27 October) Obama ordered the immediate removal of Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette from his command of the powerful Carrier Strike Group Three (CSG-3)currently located in the Middle East.CSG-3 is one of five US Navy carrier strike groups currently assigned to the US Pacific Fleet. US Navy carrier strike groups are employed in a variety of roles, which involve gaining and maintaining sea control and projecting power ashore, as well as projecting naval airpower ashore.US news reports on Obama’s unprecedented firing of a powerful US Navy Commander during wartime state that Admiral Gaouette’s removal was for “allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment” that arose during the strike group’s deployment to the Middle East. This GRU report, however, states that Admiral Gaouette’s firing by President Obama was due to this strike force commander disobeying orders when he ordered his forces on 11 September to “assist and provide intelligence for” American military forces ordered into action by US Army General Carter Ham, who was then the commander of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), against terrorist forces attacking the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.General Ham had been in command of the initial 2011 US-NATO military intervention in Libya who, like Admiral Gaouette, was fired by Obama....

In an unusual move, the Navy has replaced an admiral commanding an aircraft carrier strike group while it is deployed to the Middle East. The replacement was prompted by an Inspector General’s investigation of allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.

And theWashington Times, not known as a rumor mill, reports some possible background on General Ham's abrupt dismissal:

The information I heard today was that General Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.

Finished? Not even close, pal. Obama's ax continues to draw the blood of good men, as we ask..is Marine General John Allen really about to face a court-martial?

Marine Gen. John Allen’s alleged involvement in the romantic triangle that ensnared David Petraeus could lead to something seldom glimpsed in the American history of war: the court-martial of a top battlefield commander.Defense officials say Allen insists he has done nothing wrong, though they acknowledged he exchanged “potentially inappropriate” emails with MacDill AFB socialite Jill Kelley. But if the Defense Department’s investigation finds Allen did more than write her and actually engaged in an extramarital relationship, he would be subject to prosecution under military justice.

Although adultery is rarely a criminal matter in the civilian world, it is formally barred under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, to which Allen remains subject even as the senior four-star commander of U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan

Remember how liberals howled when we held Bill Clinton, the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, to the same standard? Just saying...

Seems as if Obama has decided to clean house at the top levels of U.S. military command. And he's doing it in his typical skulduggerous fashion - with secretive personal attacks impossible to defend against. What end is served by Obama's military coup is, of course, the real question. Is he replacing hard men with soft ones, men who will think of their CIC's political needs before their warriors on the battlefield, men who will feel a certain...empathy with America's self-declared enemies?

Or is he just trying to eliminate everyone who know anything about the 9/11 attacks in Benghazi, Libya?

Or is Obama putting in place men whom he knows won't blink an eye if he does go for that third term that has eluded all but FDR, just coincidentally the one president Obama has felt the most affinity with? What better way to prove his greatness for all the ages?

I dunno...is there a better explanation for why two top commanders were unceremoniously relieved of duty, while two other high-profile military figures were simultaneously tied to a sex scandal?

4 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Thank you for connecting the dots! I was pondering the purpose of this purge just this morning and I am glad to see someone else is wondering too. The end game has yet to be played but I think the purpose is far more sinister than anyone wants to believe. It certainly has to do with placing men into positions of power who will not question the CIC's order when it comes. What those orders will be.... I have some thoughts but I will keep those to myself for now.....